Re: [Pagekit-users] CONTENT_IF if no content file present

[Anton B. <to...@to...>]

Boris,

On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 11:14:50AM +0100, Boris Zentner wrote:

> what you describe, is the desired behavior. What happend is this, we
> look into the pagecode for CONTENT_ tags. if there are ANY, we need to
> load the content.xml file if this is not present we give a warning. So
> that you notice the absent on the contentfile. Note, that the file is
> not parsed for now.

I realize that, in general, this is the desired behavior.  But let me
push my `undef' analogy a little bit further:

  #! /usr/bin/perl -w
  print $bogus;

This will produce a warning.  But this:

  #! /usr/bin/perl -w
  print $bogus if $bogus;

will not.  Being a perl programmer for a long time, I would expect an
ANYTHING_IF to perform this sort of protection.

> > Let me explain what happens:  on the freshly started server, this
> > page invocation produces a warning which effectively becomes an
> > error for all its effects, since this warning is the very first
> > output, and hence fubars how the page looks.
> 
> this happend, while you use Apache::ErrorReport with the PerlSetVar
> ErrorReportHandler display
> 
> this is only a good choice for debugging later in a production
> environment a better choice is PerlSetVar ErrorReportHandler email
> 
> or as a third option don't use Apache::ErrorReport. then you
> apache-errorlog get the entry.

Noted, thanks.

> To verify this looks very timeconsuming and difficult to me since
> perhaps differnet toolkits are used to do the job. template-toolkit,
> html::Template, html::template::expr or html::template::jit or we have
> to write a preparser that verifies this case

> > What do you think, and what would be the easiest way to achieve
> > this?

> Im unsure if this case is worth the pain. perhaps another option is to
> elimiate the warning with a empty contentfile or you like the warning
> and use another error report option.

> Or perhaps we can add a option in the page section of the config that 
> suppress the warnings for this page.

> what is your opinion on this?

As an alternative to the `undef protection' property, I would not mind
to create a dummy content file - but then what is the procedure for the
corresponding model sub invocation?  If there's a content file the model
sub is not called, or at least I was not able to find a way to call it.

Thanks,
$Anton.
-- 
| Anton Berezin                |      FreeBSD: The power to serve |
| catpipe Systems ApS   _ _ |_ |           http://www.FreeBSD.org |
| to...@ca...    (_(_||  |                tobez@FreeBSD.org | 
| +45 7021 0050                |         Private: to...@to... |